by K. Richard, June 15, 2020 in NoTricksZone
In a new paper, atmospheric physicist Dr. Richard Lindzen summarizes the “implausible” claims today’s proponents of dangerous anthropogenic global warming espouse.
Dr. Richard Lindzen retired several years ago, and yet his immense contribution to the atmospheric sciences lives on. His research is still cited about 600 times per year.
Lindzen recently published another scientific paper (Lindzen, 2020) in The European Physical Journal criticizing the current alarmism in climate science. Here are a few of the highlights.
1. Doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration from 280 ppm to 560 ppm results in just a 1-2% perturbation to the Earth’s 240 W/m² energy budget. This doubled-CO2 effect has less than 1/5th of the impact that the net cloud effect has. And yet we are asked to accept the “implausible” claim that change in one variable, CO2, is predominatly responsible for altering global temperatures.
2. A causal role for CO2 “cannot be claimed” for the glacial-to-interglacial warming events because CO2 variations follow rather than lead the temperature changes in paleoclimate records and the 100 ppm total increase over thousands of years produce “about 1 W/m²” of total radiative impact.
3. Climate science didn’t used to be alarmist prior to the late 1980s. Scientists were instead sufficiently skeptical about claims of climatically-induced planetary doom. That changed during the years 1988-1994, when climate research centered on CO2 and global warming received a 15-fold increase in funding in the US alone. Suddenly there was a great financial incentive to propel alarming global warming scenarios.
4. Concepts like “polar amplification” are “imaginary”.
“The change in equator-to-pole temperature difference was attributed to some imaginary ‘polar amplification,’ whereby the equator-pole temperature automatically followed the mean temperature. Although the analogy is hardly exact, this is not so different from assuming that flow in a pipe depends on the mean pressure rather than the pressure gradient.”
by Die kalte Sonne, June 16, 2020 in NoTricksZone
On May 2, 2020, we reported on the movie Burned. In the USA, the focus is on biomass.
However, they do not ferment fast-growing plants into gas as is the case in Europe, rather they cut down trees and burn them in power plants – often together with other things like car tires or soaked railway ties.
The issue is controversial because it is about pure ideology. Climate organisations such as 350.org, which in the USA is like Fridays For Future (FFF) in Europe, have given their blessing to this type of power generation.
The film Planet of the Humans by Michael Moore also denounces this.
Converting CO2 sinks instantly into atmospheric CO2
And so the USA is losing valuable carbon sinks and biotopes, destroying its environment and lying to itself about sustainability and the climate. A tree that takes 50 – 100 years to become big and stately, but then is burned up in a few minutes, can never have a favorable climate balance, no matter how you calculate it. Trees are the new coal, it seems.
But anyone who thinks that this is only done in the USA, where huge forests and thus carbon sinks are destroyed, is mistaken.
“Madness”: German coal plant to be converted to burn trees
The online daily Weserkurier reports on a coal-fired power station in Wilhelmshaven (North Germany) that is to be converted to burn wood. This made Germany’s most famous forester, Peter Wohlleben (book “The Secret Life of Trees“) flash with anger on Twitter.
La géologie, une science plus que passionnante … et diverse
